'NATO 3' found not guilty of terrorism charges

The 'NATO 3': Brian Church (L), Brent Vincent Betterly (C), and Jared Chase are seen in these handout photos from the Chicago Police department released to Reuters May 19, 2012. (Reuters / Chicago Police) / Reuters

Defendants in the ‘NATO 3’ trial were found not guilty of terrorism charges on Thursday. The three young men, accused by the state of Illinois of plotting violent acts at the 2012 NATO summit in Chicago, were found guilty on two counts of mob action.

Brian Jacob Church, Brent Betterly and Jared Chase were acquitted
of charges including material support for terrorism and
conspiracy to commit terrorism.

The defendants were found guilty of two much lesser mob action
charges and one count each for possessing an incendiary device to
commit arson, which carries the possibility of up to 30 years in
prison.

After nearly three weeks of trial proceedings, the jury in the
case deliberated for just under eight hours before the verdict
was read at around 16:15 CST. Closing arguments lasted around
five hours on Thursday.

Illinois state prosecutors and attorneys for the defense said the
verdict in the trial would create a clear line between terrorism
and violence. In addition, throughout the case, the defense
showed how much the supposed plot to use molotov cocktails in
Chicago during the 2012 NATO meeting was shepherded by law
enforcement, highlighting increased counter-terrorism operations
by police in the US that critics say border on entrapment. The
defense also warned that dissent should not be conflated with
terrorism.

“When your hatred boils over into plots of violence, you've
crossed the line — the line that protects us all,” said
Assistant State's Attorney John Blakey before jurors on Thursday.

“Is this what the war on terror has come to?” asked
attorney Molly Armour, who represents Betterly.

Bond was revoked for all three defendants, the Chicago Sun-Times
reported.

Betterly, 25, Chase, 29, and Church, 22, all of Florida, were
arrested two days before the beginning of the NATO summit, in May
2012, for alleged involvement in making Molotov cocktails using
four empty beer bottles, gasoline and an undercover police
officer’s bandana.

Using recordings from two undercover Chicago police officers, the
prosecution alleged that the three men made the explosives with
the intent to use them during protests that week.

The defense consistently countered those claims, saying the
recordings, in fact, did not prove intent, and that the
prosecution was severely overreaching with the use of terrorism
charges, which are rare on the state level.

In addition to the NATO summit, the defendants were accused of
plotting to damage President Barack Obama’s Chicago headquarters,
Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s home, police precinct stations and one
downtown bank.

Prosecutors highlighted certain statements picked up in
recordings, including Church’s question to one of the undercover
officers during the creation of the Molotovs, “ready to see a
police officer on fire?” Church also said at one point that
“the city doesn’t know what it’s in for and after NATO it
will never be the same.”

For Thursday’s closing comments to jurors, Blakey even gave the
three defendants nicknames - Church was “Mr.
Cop-on-Fire,” Chase was “Captain Napalm” and
Betterly “Professor Molotov” - claiming they were hiding
violent actions “behind the legacy of nonviolent protest,”
invoking figures like Martin Luther King, Ghandi and Mother
Teresa.

“Many reasons to be proud of being an American,” Blakey
said, despite the fact that the prosecution entered as evidence
statements the defense said were unrelated to the evidence in the
case. “You can speak your mind in America,” he added.

Blakey insisted the trio crossed the line into terrorism when
they took their discontent with society into planning violent
action. He insisted to jurors the three men were not joking about
resorting to violence.

The defense said the clandestine recordings showed the three were
often stoned, drunk or plainly too obtuse to be terrorists. They
said the two undercover cops, Nadia Chikko and Mehmet Uygun,
consistently passed alcohol onto the defendants and
enthusiastically encouraged them to build the Molotovs in an
effort to find a scapegoat after months of sifting through
activist groups searching for potential criminal plots.

Chase’s attorney, Thomas Durkin, even took to mocking what the
prosecution called tools the three possessed that could be used
for terrorism - knives, a sword, a sling shot, a bow and arrow
and a throwing star that Church brought to Chicago in a guitar
case. Durkin held up the “rinky dink” sling shot in the
courtroom Thursday, drawing laughs from those present.

“Tool of the terrorism trade for sure.” he said, adding,
“Give me a break.”

The defense insisted that the pursuit of terror charges against
the trio belittled actual operations done by authorities on
terrorist networks.

“To me it trivializes terrorism — the most serious type of
case,” said Michael Deutsch, Church’s attorney. “You
think of Al-Qaeda or the people who blew up Oklahoma City. This
is not a case of terrorism.”

The defendants are due to appear in court on Feb. 28 for a
sentencing hearing.

At a post-verdict press conference, the defense attorneys called
Thursday a big loss for the state, saying Illinois prosecutors
should answer for bring a politically-motivated case, according
to FireDogLake’s Kevin Gosztola.

The jurors in the case have reportedly expressed disinterest in
divulging much of their decision process. "We don't ever ever
want to speak to the media,” they expressed, according to
DNAinfo.com’s Chicago courts reporter Erin Meyer.